This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Originally Posted by keymanjim

1. Gays couldn't marry either. But, laws have been changed (ignored, overwritten through legislative edict) to force that upon us. The point you refuse to address is, if a girl can make the very adult decision to get an abortion at any age, then why can't she make the very adult decision to get married?

Because marriage requires legal consent. Adult gays and lesbians were capable of legal consent prior to Friday's ruling. If you think that abortion should require legal consent, then that is an entirely different debate.

2. The fact that the ruling was made shows that steps in the wrong direction are being considered. Next time it may go all the way and give them full 'legal person" status. All that's needed is a activist judge to take it all the way. Just like we had with this SSM ruling.

Whether chimps are given some type of legal personhood status has nothing at all to do with this debate. It is a total non sequitur.

"You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Originally Posted by JasperL

The laws can discriminate. I'm not sure what your point is. The law discriminates against those who obtain consent before sex and rapists, for example. Some of my personal expenses, like real estate taxes, are deductible but I can't deduct new tires for my bike - darn!

Apples and oranges. Now, if you said the state allows married people to claim their new tires but not single people, you'd be in the ballpark of where the discrimination lies.

Originally Posted by JasperL

That's possible, but the problem is when you, e.g., deal with a creditor, he'll have to look at YOUR contract to see if your wife is liable on the debt if you don't pay. It greases the wheels of commerce on both sides if you just notify the creditor that you're married, and then the creditor looks to well settled state law to know whether your wife has to make good if you skip town. Same with a day care center. Who can make decisions on behalf of the child? If you're married, they have laws that tell them whether mom and/or dad can do that. Otherwise, you have to show them YOUR contract, they pay their lawyer to read it, and determine if that contract allows YOU to,say, approve that child go to the hospital or whatever. Etc............................................... ......................

Imagine - businesses would be unable to get along without government? Really? If you're seeking credit, shouldn't matter if you're married or not - the loan is based on the ability of the signatories to pay - banks and businesses will figure it out without Nancy Pelosi advising them.

Originally Posted by JasperL

Sheesh, the courts rule in accordance with state law, and state governments, not free markets, make state law.

Bottom line is even if this is all possible - free market solves all!! Marriage is a convenience to everyone. It settles a great many questions of legal rights and responsibilities, it's been litigated extensively and so you, your spouse, and other parties to any dispute involving your family have legal certainty based on centuries of settled law. What you're suggesting is they terminate this convenient set up and throw every relationship into legal limbo all because the state doesn't want to marry homosexuals. Or to use that as an excuse. It's insane enough to appeal to republicans but the rest of the world sees it as a no win proposition.

Of course you think it's insane because you come from an ideology and a mindset that believes all good things in life come from government. Lots of us, independent and capable individuals believe the opposite. Government has it's proper role, but in the bedrooms of its citizens isn't one of them.

"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Originally Posted by Fearandloathing

Now that's the worst slippery slope argument I have ever heard. In fact it's slippery cliff

I was exaggerating to make a point. You have to read it in context with this statement that I replied to... "we as State x have decided to get out of the way and allow for the broadening and availability of marriage to anyone and everyone who chooses that path. We will no longer set up restrictions and regulations, bylaws and fees, and simply recognize any coupling that comes our way."

It's ridiculous for two reasons - the state has an interest in marriage because of dozens, perhaps hundreds of laws that refer to marriage, spouse, etc. and they will want to define the qualifications for marriage in their state, one of those obviously is the minimum age at which someone can legally consent to enter into marriage.

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Apples and oranges. Now, if you said the state allows married people to claim their new tires but not single people, you'd be in the ballpark of where the discrimination lies.

I'm really not sure what your point is. Take a specific benefit of marriage, any of them, and explain why "discriminating" in favor of a married couple violates some principle of yours.

Imagine - businesses would be unable to get along without government? Really? If you're seeking credit, shouldn't matter if you're married or not - the loan is based on the ability of the signatories to pay - banks and businesses will figure it out without Nancy Pelosi advising them.

No, I didn't say they'd be "unable" to get along, I said it's a "convenience," it provides "legal certainty," etc. Of course a creditor could hire lawyers to read YOUR contract to see what obligations you have on a loan taken out by your wife. With "marriage" it already knows if you are liable on her debt, whether they can seize the jointly held home or the jointly held automobile to satisfy that debt, etc. What have we gained to throw centuries of established law out the window?

Of course you think it's insane because you come from an ideology and a mindset that believes all good things in life come from government. Lots of us, independent and capable individuals believe the opposite. Government has it's proper role, but in the bedrooms of its citizens isn't one of them.

When did I say all good things in life come from government? What I do recognize is SOME good things come from government and the convenience of marriage is one of them. And those things have nothing to do with the bedroom or what you do or don't do in it.

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Once again, you're avoiding the issue. If a girl of any age can consent to getting an abortion at any age then why can't she consent to getting married?
I can't put it any simpler than that.

Start an abortion thread if you want to talk about that.

For marriage, there are lots of reasons why a 6 year old and a 14 year old cannot be bound by most contracts, and marriage is at its core a contract with your spouse with the rights and obligations defined by state and Federal law. If you think 14 year olds are competent to enter into a marriage contract, great, write your state legislature! If he agrees and can round up the necessary votes etc. maybe the age of consent will be moved to 14. Good luck!

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Originally Posted by JasperL

Start an abortion thread if you want to talk about that.

For marriage, there are lots of reasons why a 6 year old and a 14 year old cannot be bound by most contracts, and marriage is at its core a contract with your spouse with the rights and obligations defined by state and Federal law. There is no point articulating them.

Abortion and marriage are now part of the same issue.
Now, can you answer the question or not?